Re: [PATCH net-next] net: switch to storing KCOV handle directly in sk_buff

From: Jakub Kicinski
Date: Wed Nov 25 2020 - 15:43:17 EST


On Wed, 25 Nov 2020 18:34:36 +0100 Marco Elver wrote:
> diff --git a/net/core/skbuff.c b/net/core/skbuff.c
> index ffe3dcc0ebea..070b1077d976 100644
> --- a/net/core/skbuff.c
> +++ b/net/core/skbuff.c
> @@ -233,6 +233,7 @@ struct sk_buff *__alloc_skb(unsigned int size, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> skb->end = skb->tail + size;
> skb->mac_header = (typeof(skb->mac_header))~0U;
> skb->transport_header = (typeof(skb->transport_header))~0U;
> + skb_set_kcov_handle(skb, kcov_common_handle());
>
> /* make sure we initialize shinfo sequentially */
> shinfo = skb_shinfo(skb);
> @@ -249,9 +250,6 @@ struct sk_buff *__alloc_skb(unsigned int size, gfp_t gfp_mask,
>
> fclones->skb2.fclone = SKB_FCLONE_CLONE;
> }
> -
> - skb_set_kcov_handle(skb, kcov_common_handle());

Why the move?

> out:
> return skb;
> nodata:
> @@ -285,8 +283,6 @@ static struct sk_buff *__build_skb_around(struct sk_buff *skb,
> memset(shinfo, 0, offsetof(struct skb_shared_info, dataref));
> atomic_set(&shinfo->dataref, 1);
>
> - skb_set_kcov_handle(skb, kcov_common_handle());
> -
> return skb;
> }

And why are we dropping this?

If this was omitted in earlier versions it's just a independent bug,
I don't think build_skb() will call __alloc_skb(), so we need a to
set the handle here.